|
Blaik -> RE: Iran (1/12/2014 9:38:24 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
Israeli seizures of private Palestinian land are virtually daily occurrences:
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/09/10/323122/israel-seizes-more-palestinian-lands/
Often the beneficiaries of these seizures are illegal Israeli 'settlements'/colonies. A favourite tactic is to declare the Palestinian's land a
'closed military zone', which forces the legal owners off their property. After a period of time, the land is then re-allocated to the 'settlers/colonists.
Blatant ethnic cleansing.
Not a single answer to my last observations. You can't contest with facts or logic so you blather on.
Do you not understand- Israel conquered those territories. If it so chose it could confiscate *all* the lands and kick all the people out.
These are nations that took arms against Israel, fought against them and lost. And you know what side these people were rooting for. Israel has been far more generous to these people than these people would have been if they had won.
What do you suppose would have happened to Israel if the Arab nations had defeated Israel?
Again, as time goes on, the palestinians (such as that is) will lose more land. Which can either inspire them to war (which they will lose) or inspire them, perhaps to believe that piece might be in their best interest.
So far, we see no sign of the latter.
Actually, Israel didn't 'conquer' those lands, Jews were arbitrarily given those lands by Britain to the Rothschilds, who were acting as the leaders of the British Jewish community. In the declaration, one of the caveats was that the civil and religious rights of the non-Jewish communities in the area would be protected. Never happened. Originally Jews and Christians combined were 20% of the population in that area at the time of the Declaration. Seems to me that the underhandedness and skulduggery was not on the part of the Palestinians. They'd live there in peace with the Jews for centuries prior.
The Palestinians were occupied and forced into concentration camps, called settlements. If something like that were to happen here in the US, say to Baptists, wouldn't the most common response that we would logically expect is for them to fight back for their freedom? How is it any different for the Palestinians?
As to Iran, the statements regarding Israel and the US were misrepresented and sensationalized. Ahmadinejad (who now takes the bus to his teaching job, which he did before being elected originally) made it very clear he had no plans to use a nuclear weapon on anyone. He stated it would be suicide, he could launch one that MIGHT make it, but his country would surely be obliterated afterwards. On the other hand, if his country was being invaded by a superior force, a nuke might provide enough deterrent to hold them off, at least for a while. So in reality, Iran having a nuke wouldn't give them any advantage or incentive to strike 300+nuclear weapon owning(many of which were given to them by the US) with the backing of the US and many other 1st world countries Israel. But it would give pause to the warhawks out there that want to invade Iran and have been foaming at the mouth, chomping on the bit to do so for decades.
Want to change Iran? Want to change North Korea? Drop the sanctions, flood them with a globe's worth of culture. They can try to censor, but it will make it through, and it will take hold and it will foment change. And it will bring about change from within, giving the people what they want, their will, not the will of another country who just invaded them, decimated their infrastructure, kill hundreds of thousands of innocents and whose soldiers and mercenaries inflicted horrific injustices against the populace for their amusement(not all mind you, just the truly fucked up few). That will keep said that country's government so busy the LAST thing they'll contemplate is lashing out against another country.
|
|
|
|
